Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Marty Knowles on June 26, 2009 at 13:44

thanks for the info and this could be true as I have received a call from Encana Rep's saying they are taking over the drilling operations from Shell in Sabine parish and wanted to discuss an extension of my present lease. My property is outside of Belmont in the Bozeman bottom area. Hope things will start to get active in our area,

Permalink Reply by olddog573 on June 26, 2009 at 16:43

from what i have been hearing, pleasant hill to bozeman loop will be busy with planned wells on the progress road, bozeman loop and somewhere just south of pleasant hill just north of spring ridge.

Permalink Reply by Marty Knowles on June 26, 2009 at 17:01

I'm hearing the same thing and hope it continues to move south. I am on the east side of 175 directly across from the Bozeman loop road. I am living and working in Malaysia and I appreciate the updates on activity as it is hard to keep up with the happenings being abroad

Permalink Reply by Steve on July 8, 2009 at 3:04

Hey Marty,

I hope all this keeps moving South. Drilling in the Gulf has slowed to almost nothing. Get on my website and shoot me your contact information. spgreer.com

Permalink Reply by waltcop on July 8, 2009 at 7:15

And a little to the West.......like to sec 5, T9N, R12W :-)

Permalink Reply by Pam on July 15, 2009 at 6:08

... and sec 9 ;>)

Permalink Reply by waltcop on July 15, 2009 at 10:50

Pam,
Looks like sec 9 is already unitized for Cotton Valley formation by SWEPI, don't know if it is for HS though. This raises a question......if a section is already unitized for one formation like CV and later wants to drill into the HS formation, does the section have to be re-unitized? How does this work?

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on July 15, 2009 at 11:15

SWEPI holds an HA unit order for S9 - 9N -12W. A number of operators as a matter of course will apply for multiple formations in the same application covering a surface section(s). One appearing on the public hearing schedule today applied for Hosston, Upper CV, Lower CV and HA. Every time I see that I remember Les B.'s comment that the Haynesville will lead to the exploration and production of a number of shallower formations that otherwise might never have been produced. Just call it Shale Lagniappe. And count it responsible for billions of dollars in royalties to mineral owners over the course of the next few generations.

Permalink Reply by Pam on July 16, 2009 at 8:34

waltcop,
That happened to me in DeSoto. I leased in 2006 before the Haynesville was made known and the lease specified CV, Hosston and Pettit (I think). They then applied for re-unitization to include HS. I didn't know whether to protest it or not. It would have been nice to get another lease for the HS since the 1st lease was only for $100/acre bonus and 1/6 royalty. Didn't figure I'd be able to successfully fight it anyway.

Permalink Reply by waltcop on July 16, 2009 at 9:12

Pam,
Check your lease to see if you have a Pugh Clause.......I don't know how all this works but it may apply in your case if you have that clause (ask some of the guys on GHS, they can help you)

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on July 16, 2009 at 15:48

Pam, I would like to see your lease, most leases don't mention formations. Most leases would have a depth cut off or a 100 foot below formation cut off.

Permalink Reply by Donna Thornton on August 11, 2009 at 10:20

Yes, I believe Skip is correct. The unitization papers I have (in which I am in section 9 with Pam) do, indeed, cover both the CV & HS formations.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page